The Hypocrisy of the Pope

[attofishpi]

Since the question was from Atto, I'll wait for him to respond if he has any questions. You're just spilling pixels over a question you could have answered by now.

I understand your position ReliStu, however i still would like to consider the Pope an idiot. Do you not think that if it was the RCC's position still that the Sun revolves around the Earth that the Pope should either attempt to correct the RCC position, or speak publicly his own mind?

[ReliStuPhD]

Since the question was from Atto, I'll wait for him to respond if he has any questions. You're just spilling pixels over a question you could have answered by now.

I understand your position ReliStu, however i still would like to consider the Pope an idiot. Do you not think that if it was the RCC's position still that the Sun revolves around the Earth that the Pope should either attempt to correct the RCC position, or speak publicly his own mind?

That's a great question! First, I think the Pope is speaking his mind here (i.e. he agrees with church teaching on this point), but there is plenty of precedent for Popes actually doing what they can to help move the church along into more modern positions (and, of course, plenty of examples of doing the opposite). My general impression of recent popes is that they have done what they could to speak their minds within the strictures of church doctrine. Francis' comments regarding gays and lesbians speaks to this. But like I said, I have little doubt that Francis believes that church doctrine is sound on the issue on contraception and overpopulation. If you read up on these doctrines, I think you'll see how he can at least claim to be following a coherent "policy," even if, as it seems we both believe, that policy is backwards.

But let me clear: I'm totally OK that you think Francis is an idiot on this point. I'm not exactly over the moon that the RCC keeps sticking with this archaic position. I just understand the position well enough to see how they can at least defend themselves against charges of incoherence (and I like some of the underlying positions concerning fidelity, etc). And, from a historical standpoint, I understand why they're so slow to make changes. For what it's worth, I actually trust the RCC more than many other religious organizations precisely because they move at a glacial pace. And by "trust," I don't mean "believe in" but more "know what to expect."

[attofishpi]

Since the question was from Atto, I'll wait for him to respond if he has any questions. You're just spilling pixels over a question you could have answered by now.

I understand your position ReliStu, however i still would like to consider the Pope an idiot. Do you not think that if it was the RCC's position still that the Sun revolves around the Earth that the Pope should either attempt to correct the RCC position, or speak publicly his own mind?

That's a great question! First, I think the Pope is speaking his mind here (i.e. he agrees with church teaching on this point), but there is plenty of precedent for Popes actually doing what they can to help move the church along into more modern positions (and, of course, plenty of examples of doing the opposite). My general impression of recent popes is that they have done what they could to speak their minds within the strictures of church doctrine. Francis' comments regarding gays and lesbians speaks to this. But like I said, I have little doubt that Francis believes that church doctrine is sound on the issue on contraception and overpopulation. If you read up on these doctrines, I think you'll see how he can at least claim to be following a coherent "policy," even if, as it seems we both believe, that policy is backwards.

But let me clear: I'm totally OK that you think Francis is an idiot on this point. I'm not exactly over the moon that the RCC keeps sticking with this archaic position. I just understand the position well enough to see how they can at least defend themselves against charges of incoherence (and I like some of the underlying positions concerning fidelity, etc). And, from a historical standpoint, I understand why they're so slow to make changes. For what it's worth, I actually trust the RCC more than many other religious organizations precisely because they move at a glacial pace. And by "trust," I don't mean "believe in" but more "know what to expect."

Thanks ReliStu.
RE your point:- But like I said, I have little doubt that Francis believes that church doctrine is sound on the issue on contraception and overpopulation.

Fraid i am lazy, or at least have better things to do than read up on church doctrine. I do think it is idiocy for Francis to believe in the church's stance on contraception if it is not to be found in the bible anywhere that God has indicated that this is a sin, especially when faced with the current dilema of overpopulation and for him to express opinions relating to the state of the planet where this overpopulation is the key cause.

[ReliStuPhD]

But like I said, I have little doubt that Francis believes that church doctrine is sound on the issue on contraception and overpopulation.

I agree. My point is that he's not being hypocritical about it. He may well be wrong, but hypocrisy is claiming one thing and behaving in the opposite manner. As far as I can tell, his behavior is in line with his claims. That was my main issue with your post. I have little doubt that you and I are actually on the same page when it comes to whether church doctrine on this topic is even remotely in keeping with modern times. They're still stuck in the 18th-19th centuries on this.

Fraid i am lazy, or at least have better things to do than read up on church doctrine. I do think it is idiocy for Francis to believe in the church's stance on contraception if it is not to be found in the bible anywhere that God has indicated that this is a sin, especially when faced with the current dilema of overpopulation and for him to express opinions relating to the state of the planet where this overpopulation is the key cause.

Well, church doctrine works through this particular issue and does show how it's in the Bible (or at least in how they interpret it). It's a fairly robust setup, so far, far beyond the typical Protestant "here's where it literally says X in the Bible." Instead, the prohibition against contraception is tied to a whole system of sex qua procreative act, fidelity within marriage, sanctity of life, etc, etc, etc, blah, blah, blah. Put differently, Francis isn't actually being an idiot (stupid) here because of just how well thought-out this position is (though, again, he may be wrong). I think if you ever get around to reading church doctrine on this, you'll at least come away with a begrudging respect for how detailed the whole system on this point. For my part, it helped me understand why the RCC holds this position. I still think the Church wrong, but I certainly no longer believe this is a position arrived at willy-nilly. That is to say, I respect the thinking behind the position, even if I don't respect the position itself.

But in the end, I definitely agree with your appraisal of how relevant the position is. I just disagree on the idiot/hypocrisy part. Smart, thoughtful people can still be quite wrong (*cough* atheists *cough*). That's the case here, imo.

[attofishpi]

Sure, but you've misquoted me above - on the first quote you are actually agreeing with yourself!

[ReliStuPhD]

Sure, but you've misquoted me above - on the first quote you are actually agreeing with yourself!

Ohhhhhhh! Your quoting style threw me off. lol. /facepalm

[Dalek Prime]

Sure, but you've misquoted me above - on the first quote you are actually agreeing with yourself!

Ohhhhhhh! Your quoting style threw me off. lol. /facepalm

Hopefully RS does agree with himself.

[ReliStuPhD]

Sure, but you've misquoted me above - on the first quote you are actually agreeing with yourself!

Ohhhhhhh! Your quoting style threw me off. lol. /facepalm

Hopefully RS does agree with himself.

Haha! Very true!